True. Actually - I like the new rules. Less posting overall - but it maintains some order and discipline.

Ironically enough, if less posting is the result of the new rule(s), then you are the one most affected by it. In other words, the same effect could have been achieved if you simply decided to post less.

I see the virtue in both approaches, which is why I think we ought to alternate between the two from time to time. We can even sync up our rules with the political season, either creating a flurry of getbig verbal violence during an election OR forcing civility during the election and having a free-for-all offseason, depending upon our preference(s).

Ironically enough, if less posting is the result of the new rule(s), then you are the one most affected by it. In other words, the same effect could have been achieved if you simply decided to post less.

Whether you were the only one or not is irrelevant. If you had decided to voluntarily stop posting, the volume of posts on this board would have fallen dramatically. That's an indisputable fact. You were, single-handedly, responsible for a very large volume of posts (arguably, the largest) on a day to day basis.

Now couple that with the fact that the vast majority of your posts lacked any substance, being mindless copy-paste jobs, while the rest were nothing more than attacks on Obama and those who were were challenging your positions or attempting to debate you.

The result would have been that if you simply stopped posting, the volume of posts would have gone down, the amount of personal insults would have gone down and the average quality of posts would have gone up.